[barmar]

 pescetom, on 2023-July-06, 14:58, said:

Yet again I find myself unexpectedly in line with ACBL. At least one of the two is wandering

I find this a very strange decision by ACBL.

Historically its general philosophy has been that when a bid has a nearly universal artificial meaning, any other meaning is alerted. The common convention is either not alerted (e.g. Stayman and takeout doubles) or announced (e.g. Jacoby transfers).

An unalerted 2♣ response to 1NT will always be assumed to be some flavor of Stayman. Allowing it to be natural without an alert is a huge departure from their general approach, since no one would ever think of asking for an explanation. The basic idea can be summed up as "alert to warn the opponents that something unusual is happening and they may want to ask"

The previous version of the Alert procedure had the following general principle:

Quote

Natural bids that convey an unexpected meaning must be Alerted. This includes
strong bids that sound weak, weak bids that sound strong, and all other bids that, by
agreement, convey meanings different from, or in addition to, the expected meaning
ascribed to them.

I think non-Stayman 2♣ would fall under the highlighted case.

I wonder if this was an intentional change, or something that fell through the cracks in the redesign.

[jillybean]

A little off topic but I don't want to start an entirely new thread.

I'm filling in at a game today. We are having a competitive auction, I am passing throughout.
My partner reaches for the pass card, hesitates, reaches, hesitates and then removes his hand from the bidding box and starts thinking.

LHO, in a rather loud and authoritative voice states "I've been playing bridge for a long time, long enough to know you can't do that - you must take a bid from that part of the bidding box now." (pass,X,XX,alert). My partner looks a little bewildered, I say I think you should call the Director. (yes , I could and would have if he hadn't but it's less offensive and provocative for the opps to call)

The Director was called and did a fabulous job 1. of refuting the quoted "Law" and 2. explaining potential UI, carry on and call me back if you feel you have been damaged.

These same players don't bother announcing their 1nt range, and if you ask - 'it's normal', and would never get the hang of alerting a natural bid.

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2023-July-06, 21:21, said:

A little off topic but I don't want to start an entirely new thread.

I'm filling in at a game today. We are having a competitive auction, I am passing throughout.
My partner reaches for the pass card, hesitates, reaches, hesitates and then removes his hand from the bidding box and starts thinking.

LHO, in a rather loud and authoritative voice states "I've been playing bridge for a long time, long enough to know you can't do that - you must take a bid from that part of the bidding box now." (pass,X,XX,alert). My partner looks a little bewildered, I say I think you should call the Director. (yes , I could and would have if he hadn't but it's less offensive and provocative for the opps to call)

The Director was called and did a fabulous job 1. of refuting the quoted "Law" and 2. explaining potential UI, carry on and call me back if you feel you have been damaged.

Did Director also do a fabulous job of explaining to your partner that his behaviour was inappropriate and unacceptable in future? You are sensitive about NOS sometimes being treated as culprits and OS as victims, this seems somewhat similar. They shouldn't be bullying but do well to complain.

[jillybean]

 pescetom, on 2023-July-07, 11:06, said:

Did Director also do a fabulous job of explaining to your partner that his behaviour was inappropriate and unacceptable in future? You are sensitive about NOS sometimes being treated as culprits and OS as victims, this seems somewhat similar. They shouldn't be bullying but do well to complain.

Yes, the Director explained how my partner's actions could cause problems and it was best to avoid touching the bidding box until the decision was made. Of course this, and other actions do create UI and that is sometimes unavoidable. The real test is on partner to avoid taking advantage of any UI.
As for the opponents, yes they should protect themselves but they need to do so appropriately.